CORRESPONDENCE.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XXVII, Issue 2755, 26 June 1894, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

PROTECTION. To the Editor of the Star. I Sir, — The contention is. " that proteotion oheapens production^" The Scientific Amerioan has proved by I statistics that protection has actually cheapened production. Geo. Hatchison, in speaking in favor'of protection, asserted that protection would cheapen prodnotion. G. F. Baker says so, and they are all pretty good authority, therefore the weight of evidence is in our favor and not against us. So far-.no/ freetrader haa oome forward and asserted the contrary •• that protection appreciates or'lnbreaseTlhe" valne of production," not one. .That argument would not ,have a leg* to standon ; many have had actual experience. If any freetrader was so foolish as to: assert thaf " protection did not obeapen production " I would exueot G. Fi Baker to trot out his; Soientifio American and belabour bis thick head with " statistics." I have a great respeot for the Hawera faotory and for the .energetio men who work it, but does Mr Baker want more protection to cheapen its production ot washboards. , In Amerioa protection has cheapened the production of wood washboards to as- 6d Rzaozeix leay &fa-each : does Mr Baker.; want* 'protection 1 in Ifojw Zealand to bring our local made washboards down to that ? . Most- sensible people prefer a really good" .article looally made; and are prepared .to pay.a. fair price, for it, and the Hawera washboards are "appreciated" by the people of this district, and are gradually getting knowa and taking the place of the protected or' cheapened American production (no advertisement, Mr Editor). Mr Baker has rent .the "flag of protection V in twain, and now says :— •• There are two kinds of protection : judioiona and injaaiojone." Mr Baker poses as tbejuage of what is iudioious and injudicious, and has given ns one arffole oat of the projteotive tariff us ari index. I would reoommend him ,to get a copy of "the" j Customs tariff of New Zealand" and further enlighten the working -nienf by disoussing it article by. article.Mr Baker is a far-Beeing man— looking backwards. He' tells 'us " England's^ prosperity is due to the fact, that she haa been 'mistress ot the seas',' over 800 v years, and has exacted tribute I '(this is an old- fashioned name for protective tariff) from the whole world."' The strong always protect cbe weak. She levied a protective tariff on the treasure Bhips of Spain; she proteotod India and China. While the Northern States of'Americawere advooating.proieotion and : tbe cheap--emng of production, and the - Southern States advocating freetrade and. apprecia^ uon of produoe, winding, op the argument by a family set-to, England , protected American commerce and got a monopoly of the oarrying trade. Protection likes a monopoly. With Prussia" as ' an ally' during v ther saven years' war, England proteoted or oheapened the surplus pro- 1 duction of other countries by twelve millions. This « shows the value, of >a protective tariff: no deficit there, Mr Editor, to ascribe ,to; protection. This kind of protection became tf injudicious," so England went in for banking, "judicious protection," ana lends out her millions,' taking the wealth ana treasure by means of interest scoured by a '• protective tariff." Therefore, England's prosperity is due to protection. The seven years' war was the cause of protection ; the effect has been the production of washing -boards at, Hawera. Having no 1 opposition to our contention that "protection cheapens production," it remains to thank you for kindly placing your paper at our "disposalto prove this great truth. So no more at present from yours truly, r Wobjking Man. » To the Editor of the Star. ' Sia,—" Working Mao.!! Jibs very neatly veiled the irony of his letters on protection, bat lest some should take up his or somebody's war-cry of "Protection oheapens production" in real earnest I should like to ,put the matter simply leaving but the satire. "Protection cheapens production" : Then producers do not want promotion, no matter whether they are producers of food, clothing machinery thing else. But what ao we find ? Why tailors and engineers wood-workers, and leather- workers are loudly asking for protection. Surely they do;not aßk that what they produce should be reduced in price 1 No, they know that " pjroteotion mast enhance prices " or it is of no use to them. Farmers do not ask for protection bepause no protective tariff will increase the price of this produce since that is regulated by the world's market— London largely. Mr Baker has taken the wasbingboardmakers as an illustration. So be wishes the thousands who purchase washiogboards to pay a higher price for what they buy fan inferior artiole too, I expect) so that the half dozen washingboard-makerfl may may get better pay— even, if the. better pay really does go to the aotrial' makers Women electors beware I you' see what protectionists have in store for you. And yet they call this Liberalism— please mina the capital letter. I have always heard that the Liberal motto was " The greatest good to the greatest number," and how will protection agree with that noble principle ? Consumers enormously outnumber proauoers in every calling, hence the plain auty of true Liberals is to legislate for the benefit of fche consumers— their own people. . I hooe I am not too long. I know that Parliamentary, affairs will take up. your space or I wouia eav | more.— l am, &c, G. H. Maunder.